Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Willingness To Pay Survey for Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load: Instrument, Pre-Test, and Implementation, 9045-9046 [2013-02763]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 26 / Thursday, February 7, 2013 / Notices
www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/
transconf/pastsips.htm. The adequate
MVEBs are shown in the following
table:
Rick
Westlund (202) 566–1682, or email at
westlund.rick@epa.gov and please refer
to the appropriate EPA Information
Collection Request (ICR) Number.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON AREA
MVEBS 2009 ATTAINMENT PLAN
OMB Responses to Agency Clearance
AND 2010 CONTINGENCY PLAN
Requests
OMB Approvals
EPA ICR Number 0161.12; Foreign
2009 ..........
66.5
146.1 Purchaser Acknowledgment Statement
2010 ..........
N/A
144.3 of Unregistered Pesticides; 40 CFR part
168, subpart D; was approved on 01/04/
Transportation conformity is required 2013; OMB Number 2070–0027; expires
by section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act,
on 01/31/2016; Approved without
as amended in 1990. EPA’s conformity
change.
EPA ICR Number 2263.04; NSPS for
rule requires that transportation plans,
Petroleum Refineries for which
programs and projects conform to state
Construction, Reconstruction, or
air quality implementation plans and
Modification Commenced after May 14,
establishes the criteria and procedures
for determining whether or not they do. 2007; 40 CFR part 60, subparts A and Ja;
was approved on 01/07/2013; OMB
Conformity to a SIP means that
Number 2060–0602; expires on 12/31/
transportation activities will not
2015; Approved without change.
produce new air quality violations,
EPA ICR Number 1718.09; Fuel
worsen existing violations, or delay
Quality Regulations for Diesel Fuel Sold
timely attainment of the national
in 2001 and Later Years; Tax-Exempt
ambient air quality standards. The
(Dyed) Highway Diesel Fuel; and Noncriteria by which EPA determines
whether a SIP’s MVEBs are adequate for Road Locomotive and Marine Diesel
Fuel (Renewal); 40 CFR 80.561 and
conformity purposes are outlined in 40
CFR 93.118(e)(4). EPA has described the 80.597; and 40 CFR part 80 subpart I;
process for determining the adequacy of was approved on 01/19/2013; OMB
Number 2060–0308; expires on 01/31/
submitted SIP budgets in 40 CFR
2016; Approved with change.
93.118(f) and has followed this rule in
EPA ICR Number 2450.01; EPA’s
making its adequacy determination.
Design for the Environment (DfE)
Dated: January 25, 2013.
Partner of the Year Awards Program;
W.C. Early,
was approved on 01/23/2013; OMB
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
Number 2070–0184; expires on 01/31/
[FR Doc. 2013–02808 Filed 2–6–13; 8:45 am]
2016; Approved with change.
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
EPA ICR Number 1901.05; NSPS for
Emission Guidelines and Compliance
Times for Small Municipal Waste
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Combustion Units Constructed on or
AGENCY
before August 30, 1999; 40 CFR part 60,
subparts A and BBBB; was approved on
[FRL–9528–1]
01/29/2013; OMB Number 2060–0424;
expires on 01/31/2016; Approved
Agency Information Collection
without change.
Activities OMB Responses
EPA ICR Number 1061.12; NSPS for
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
the Phosphate Fertilizer Industry; 40
Agency (EPA).
CFR part 60, subparts T, U, V, W and
X; was approved on 01/30/2013; OMB
ACTION: Notice.
Number 2060–0037; expires on 01/31/
SUMMARY: This document announces the 2016; Approved without change.
Office of Management and Budget
EPA ICR Number 1935.04;
(OMB) responses to Agency Clearance
Standardized Permit for RCRA
requests, in compliance with the
Hazardous Waste Management Facilities
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
(Renewal); 40 CFR part 267; 40 CFR
3501 et seq.). An agency may not
270.290, 270.300–270.315; was
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
approved on 01/30/2013; OMB Number
required to respond to, a collection of
2050–0182; expires on 01/31/2016;
information unless it displays a
Approved with change.
currently valid OMB control number.
EPA ICR Number 2323.05; NESHAP
The OMB control numbers for EPA
for Chemical Manufacturing Area
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9
Sources; 40 CFR part 63, subparts A and
and 48 CFR chapter 15.
VVVVVV; was approved on 01/30/2013;
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Milestone
year
VerDate Mar<15>2010
VOCs
(tons per day)
17:45 Feb 06, 2013
NOX
(tons per day)
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
9045
OMB Number 2060–0621; expires on
01/31/2016; Approved without change.
John Moses,
Director, Collections Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2013–02761 Filed 2–6–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OA–2012–0033; FRL–9527–8]
Information Collection Request
Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request;
Willingness To Pay Survey for
Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily
Load: Instrument, Pre-Test, and
Implementation
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency has submitted an information
collection request (ICR), ‘‘Willingness to
Pay Survey for Chesapeake Bay Total
Maximum Daily Load: Instrument, Pretest, and Implementation’’ (EPA ICR No.
2456.01, OMB Control No. 2010–NEW)
to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
This is a request for approval of a new
collection. Public comments were
previously requested via the Federal
Register (77 FR 31006) on May 24, 2012
during a 60-day comment period, which
was later extended for an additional 30
days (77 FR 43822). This notice allows
for an additional 30 days for public
comments. A fuller description of the
ICR is given below, including its
estimated burden and cost to the public.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor
and a person is not required to respond
to a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
DATES: Additional comments may be
submitted on or before March 11, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
referencing Docket ID Number EPA–
HQ–OA–2012–0033, to (1) EPA online
using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method); by email to
oei.docket@epa.gov; by fax at (202) 566–
9744; or by mail to: EPA Docket Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mail
Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2)
OMB via email to
oira_submission@omb.eop.gov. Address
comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.
EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\07FEN1.SGM
07FEN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
9046
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 26 / Thursday, February 7, 2013 / Notices
docket without change including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes profanity, threats,
information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Nathalie Simon, National Center for
Environmental Economics, Office of
Policy, (1809T), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number: 202–566–2347; fax
number: 202–566–2363; email address:
simon.nathalie@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Supporting documents which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will
be collecting are available in the public
docket for this ICR. The docket can be
viewed online at www.regulations.gov
or in person at the EPA Docket Center,
EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW. Washington,
DC. The telephone number for the
Docket Center is 202–566–1744. For
additional information about EPA’s
public docket, visit https://www.epa.gov/
dockets.
Abstract: The Clean Water Act (CWA)
directs EPA to coordinate Federal and
State efforts to improve water quality in
the Chesapeake Bay. In 2009, Executive
Order (E.O.) 13508 reemphasized this
mandate, directing EPA to define the
next generation of tools and actions to
restore water quality in the Bay and
describe the changes to be made to
regulations, programs, and policies to
implement these actions. The
Chesapeake Bay watershed encompasses
64,000 square miles in parts of six states
and the District of Columbia. It is the
largest estuary in the United States and
the third largest in the world. The
Chesapeake Bay’s unique set of
ecological and cultural elements has
motivated efforts to preserve and restore
its condition for more than 25 years.
Significant progress has been made over
that period however, pollution budgets,
called Total Maximum Daily Loads
(TMDLs), are necessary to continue
progress toward the goal of a healthy
Bay. The watershed states of New York,
Pennsylvania, Delaware, West Virginia,
Virginia, and Maryland, as well as the
District of Columbia, have developed
Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPs)
detailing the steps each will take to
meet its obligations under the TMDL.
As part of the next phase of this effort,
EPA is undertaking an assessment of the
costs and benefits of meeting Total
Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs), of
nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment for
the Chesapeake Bay. As an input to the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:45 Feb 06, 2013
Jkt 229001
TMDL benefits study, EPA’s National
Center for Environmental Economics
(NCEE) is seeking approval to conduct
a stated preference survey to collect data
on households’ use of Chesapeake Bay
and its watershed, preferences for a
variety of water quality improvements
likely to follow from pollution
reduction programs, and demographic
information. If approved, the survey
would be administered by mail in two
phases to a sample of 9,140 residents
living in the Chesapeake Bay states,
Chesapeake Bay watershed, and other
east coast states.
Benefits from meeting the TMDL for
the Chesapeake Bay will accrue to those
who live near the Bay or visit for
recreation, those who live near or visit
lakes and rivers in the watershed, and
those who live further away and/or may
never visit the Bay but have a general
concern for the environment. While
benefits from the first two categories can
be measured using hedonic property
value, recreational demand, and other
revealed preference approaches, only
stated preference methods can capture
nonuse benefits (i.e., benefits to those
who may never visit the Bay).
Transferring estimates from other
studies based in other estuaries is not
advised as these results are unlikely to
accurately or completely capture
willingness to pay for TMDL-related
improvements in the Chesapeake Bay
Watershed given the unique character of
this water resource and the goods and
services it provides. Further, there are
limited stated preference studies in the
published literature focusing on the
Chesapeake Bay, and no studies
specifically addressing the
environmental improvements predicted
under the TMDL. This study will
provide policy makers with additional
information on the public’s preferences
for improvements to the Chesapeake
Bay and lakes in the watershed. NCEE
will use the survey responses to
estimate willingness to pay for changes
related to reductions in nitrogen,
phosphorous, and sediment loadings to
the Bay and lakes in the Chesapeake Bay
watershed. The analysis relies on state
of the art theoretical and statistical tools
for non-market welfare analysis. The
results of this study will inform the
public and policy makers about the
benefits of improvements to the
Chesapeake Bay and lakes in the
watershed. A non-response survey will
also be administered to inform the
interpretation and validation of survey
responses. Participation in the survey
will be voluntary and the identity of the
respondents will be kept confidential to
the extent provided by law.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The project is being undertaken
pursuant to section 104 of the Clean
Water Act which authorizes and directs
the EPA Administrator to conduct
research into a number of subject areas
related to water quality, water pollution,
and water pollution prevention and
abatement. This section also authorizes
the EPA Administrator to conduct
research into methods of analyzing the
costs and benefits of programs carried
out under the Clean Water Act.
Form Numbers: None.
Respondents/affected entities:
Individuals 18 years of age or older
residing in one of 17 east coast U.S.
states and the District of Columbia.
Respondent’s obligation to respond:
Voluntary.
Estimated number of respondents:
2,742 total to full survey total (includes
150 from pretest and 2,592 from main
survey. An additional 770 total to nonresponse follow-up survey (50 from
pretest and 720 from full survey
administration).
Frequency of response: One time
collection.
Total estimated burden: 887 hours.
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
Total estimated cost: $20,682 (per
year), includes $0 annualized capital or
operation & maintenance costs.
John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2013–02763 Filed 2–6–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OECA–2012–0655; FRL–9527–9]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment
Request; NSPS for Ammonium Sulfate
Manufacturing Plants (Renewal)
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
In compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.), this document announces
that an Information Collection Request
(ICR) has been forwarded to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and approval. This is a request
to renew an existing approved
collection. The ICR which is abstracted
below describes the nature of the
collection and the estimated burden and
cost.
DATES: Additional comments may be
submitted on or before March 11, 2013.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\07FEN1.SGM
07FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 26 (Thursday, February 7, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9045-9046]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-02763]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[EPA-HQ-OA-2012-0033; FRL-9527-8]
Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; Willingness To Pay Survey for Chesapeake Bay
Total Maximum Daily Load: Instrument, Pre-Test, and Implementation
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), ``Willingness to Pay Survey for
Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load: Instrument, Pre-test, and
Implementation'' (EPA ICR No. 2456.01, OMB Control No. 2010-NEW) to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
This is a request for approval of a new collection. Public comments
were previously requested via the Federal Register (77 FR 31006) on May
24, 2012 during a 60-day comment period, which was later extended for
an additional 30 days (77 FR 43822). This notice allows for an
additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR
is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to
respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number.
DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before March 11,
2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OA-2012-0033, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method); by email to oei.docket@epa.gov; by fax at (202) 566-
9744; or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection
Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460, and (2) OMB via email to oira_submission@omb.eop.gov. Address
comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.
EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public
[[Page 9046]]
docket without change including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to
be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Nathalie Simon, National Center
for Environmental Economics, Office of Policy, (1809T), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number: 202-566-2347; fax number: 202-566-2363; email
address: simon.nathalie@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW. Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
Abstract: The Clean Water Act (CWA) directs EPA to coordinate
Federal and State efforts to improve water quality in the Chesapeake
Bay. In 2009, Executive Order (E.O.) 13508 reemphasized this mandate,
directing EPA to define the next generation of tools and actions to
restore water quality in the Bay and describe the changes to be made to
regulations, programs, and policies to implement these actions. The
Chesapeake Bay watershed encompasses 64,000 square miles in parts of
six states and the District of Columbia. It is the largest estuary in
the United States and the third largest in the world. The Chesapeake
Bay's unique set of ecological and cultural elements has motivated
efforts to preserve and restore its condition for more than 25 years.
Significant progress has been made over that period however, pollution
budgets, called Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs), are necessary to
continue progress toward the goal of a healthy Bay. The watershed
states of New York, Pennsylvania, Delaware, West Virginia, Virginia,
and Maryland, as well as the District of Columbia, have developed
Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPs) detailing the steps each will
take to meet its obligations under the TMDL.
As part of the next phase of this effort, EPA is undertaking an
assessment of the costs and benefits of meeting Total Maximum Daily
Loads (TMDLs), of nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment for the Chesapeake
Bay. As an input to the TMDL benefits study, EPA's National Center for
Environmental Economics (NCEE) is seeking approval to conduct a stated
preference survey to collect data on households' use of Chesapeake Bay
and its watershed, preferences for a variety of water quality
improvements likely to follow from pollution reduction programs, and
demographic information. If approved, the survey would be administered
by mail in two phases to a sample of 9,140 residents living in the
Chesapeake Bay states, Chesapeake Bay watershed, and other east coast
states.
Benefits from meeting the TMDL for the Chesapeake Bay will accrue
to those who live near the Bay or visit for recreation, those who live
near or visit lakes and rivers in the watershed, and those who live
further away and/or may never visit the Bay but have a general concern
for the environment. While benefits from the first two categories can
be measured using hedonic property value, recreational demand, and
other revealed preference approaches, only stated preference methods
can capture nonuse benefits (i.e., benefits to those who may never
visit the Bay).
Transferring estimates from other studies based in other estuaries
is not advised as these results are unlikely to accurately or
completely capture willingness to pay for TMDL-related improvements in
the Chesapeake Bay Watershed given the unique character of this water
resource and the goods and services it provides. Further, there are
limited stated preference studies in the published literature focusing
on the Chesapeake Bay, and no studies specifically addressing the
environmental improvements predicted under the TMDL. This study will
provide policy makers with additional information on the public's
preferences for improvements to the Chesapeake Bay and lakes in the
watershed. NCEE will use the survey responses to estimate willingness
to pay for changes related to reductions in nitrogen, phosphorous, and
sediment loadings to the Bay and lakes in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
The analysis relies on state of the art theoretical and statistical
tools for non-market welfare analysis. The results of this study will
inform the public and policy makers about the benefits of improvements
to the Chesapeake Bay and lakes in the watershed. A non-response survey
will also be administered to inform the interpretation and validation
of survey responses. Participation in the survey will be voluntary and
the identity of the respondents will be kept confidential to the extent
provided by law.
The project is being undertaken pursuant to section 104 of the
Clean Water Act which authorizes and directs the EPA Administrator to
conduct research into a number of subject areas related to water
quality, water pollution, and water pollution prevention and abatement.
This section also authorizes the EPA Administrator to conduct research
into methods of analyzing the costs and benefits of programs carried
out under the Clean Water Act.
Form Numbers: None.
Respondents/affected entities: Individuals 18 years of age or older
residing in one of 17 east coast U.S. states and the District of
Columbia.
Respondent's obligation to respond: Voluntary.
Estimated number of respondents: 2,742 total to full survey total
(includes 150 from pretest and 2,592 from main survey. An additional
770 total to non-response follow-up survey (50 from pretest and 720
from full survey administration).
Frequency of response: One time collection.
Total estimated burden: 887 hours. Burden is defined at 5 CFR
1320.03(b).
Total estimated cost: $20,682 (per year), includes $0 annualized
capital or operation & maintenance costs.
John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2013-02763 Filed 2-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
